Interesting discussion over at Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/1kd90jz/how_is_arch_linux_so_reliable/
Lots of good comments, a sampling:
Arch Linux doesn’t habe to care for multiple branches and versions. Except for the testing branch there is only one target to focus on.
The Debian based distributions often have multiple LTS versions out there and they have to backport new patches into old versions of software. On Arch Linux the maintainer basically just grab a new version from a developer. Less patching needed.
Basically:
- people who use Arch are quite skilled, so it’s easier to have bugs fixed;
- since it’s a rolling release, it’s easy to hotfix something;
- the Wiki is incredibly good and detailed, which helps mastering the whole distro and then finding the source of a bug;
- it’s used by many skilled people who like good quality stuff, thus they fix things when they break;
- there is a good dedicated system to report bugs and find reports when one already exists, so people can easily find and share a bug report and make progress on it. Team work is important.
I experienced 2 major bugs over several years, each time they were fixed in less than an hour. Which means that most people won’t even get those bugs. Arch is not less prone to bugs than another distribution. It just fixes them way way way faster, most of the time before it reaches the average end user.
And another related thread:
https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1ka5xyb/am_i_crazy_or_is_arch_linux_the_easiest_distro_to/